Colin Powell today joined Admiral Mullin to oppose Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and call for its repeal! Check out this video from tonight’s Hardball with Chris Matthews as he interviews a Republican and Democratic strategist on the issue.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Yes, like a good political junkie / nerd, i excitedly and hurried my way home from work at 5:30 so i could arrive at my apartment in time to watch the State of the Union address from start to finish. Yes, i made it as well as made dinner in time to watch Obama speak.
I’m not here to write a article going over the entirety of the speech. Mostly what i can tell you is that it was a great speech of one liners and bumper stickers. It was brilliantly prepared to put the face of the blame game squarely (and rightfully) on the side of the Republicans. But the one thing i took from it was the one thing i knew was coming… Obama called for the repeal of military’s Don’t Ask Don”t Tell policy (the DODT section is short and the vid below covers other stuff as well):
I admit that i actually went in to wathing the address hoping that Obama would say something beyond “I will work with…” or mereley suggesting or calling for the repeal of Dont Ask Dont Tell. I have to say i am one of those gay political activists (and donors) who believes Obama could solve this problem with, literally, the flick of a pen on an executive order that simply tells the military to stop trying. Oh well. I will say that even that call for, suggesting or even promise to work with is a first step. But the repeal of this law is the final step that Obama should shoot for.
I still remain skeptical of Obama’s promises. His promise to work with both Congress and the military is familiar from campaign rhetoric (Disclosure: I worked for and voted for Hillary). But in the face of a troubled economy and suffering health care system, i can sit back and say, “Fine. Work on the other stuff.” But how long can you use the excuse of more pressing national matters before the matter of honorable and patriatic Americans being forced out of the military, who desperately needs many of their skills, is tackled and repealed?
It’s not all Obama, i agree. Repealing DODT is a political hot potatoe. Conservatives and the down Right (typo intentional) anti-gay groups will come out and try to keep things as they are. Take John McCain’s statement immediately following the State of the Union:
“At a time when our armed forces are fighting and sacrificing on the battlefield, now is not the time to abandon the policy,” said McCain, R-Ariz.
Read full MSNBC article here
I have to say i’m actually really offended by John McCain’s statement. To me, it feels as if he’s implying that the sacrifices by gay servicemen and women are somehow less than those by their straight brothers and sisters in arms. As if allowing patriotic men and women who have voluntarily given up their civilian lives to fight and die in two wars; for people who don’t even want to acknowledge their rights as individuals; that to allow them to serve openly will somehow be harmful to everyone else. Screw you John McCain. Would you have turned away a gay servicemember had one come to rescue you from your Viatnamese prison because it would somehow discredit the sacrifices you made in war?
The point here is that there will probably never be a “good time” to tackle Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. It will be a political hot button issue until it is finally repealed. Gay activists are not wrong, nor selfish, nor impatient in their pursuit of equality and it should never be said that we do not act. We should continue to press Obama and other politicians to face the fact that tackling DODT is going to be tough. But in the recent words of President Obama: “It is the right thing to do” and ”we don’t quit. I don’t quit. Let’s seize this moment” Let us repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell!
The trial to hear the constitutionality of Proposition 8 in Federal Court begun today in San Francisco. Unfortunately, the court has blocked recording of the trial to be aired on YouTube. But you can follow live reporting on Twitter and websites. Here are just a few reporters:
[Legal Info Note] Today’s trial is NOT before the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS). Today’s trial is the beginning of the Federal Trial against Prop 8 that, through appeal, could eventually be brought before SCOTUS. However, SCOTUS did intervene today by saying it would not allow the Federal Court in SF to record the trial for airing on YouTube.
Twitter:
American Foundation for Equal Rights
Non-Twitter
Prop 8 Trial Tracker (Courage Campaign)
Ted Olson (right) and David Boise, normally two attorneys on opposite sides of the courtrooom (who even argued against each other in Gore v. Bush in 2000) have taken up the task of arguing against Prop 8 in US Supreme Court (SCOTUS). Their move is rather controversial, even among gay rights activists, as some beleive the movement isnt ready to take this issue of gay-marriage to the nations highest court; wanting to wait until more local and state victories before asking SCOTUS to rule. Nevertheless, this dynamic duo of legal clout is marching forward.
In a recent NEWSWEEK article: The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage, Ted Olson writes why, as a staunch Conservative Republican, he supports legalizing gay-marriage. It’s three pages long and worth the read. Here is an excerpt:
Many of my fellow conservatives have an almost knee-jerk hostility toward gay marriage. This does not make sense, because same-sex unions promote the values conservatives prize. Marriage is one of the basic building blocks of our neighborhoods and our nation. At its best, it is a stable bond between two individuals who work to create a loving household and a social and economic partnership. We encourage couples to marry because the commitments they make to one another provide benefits not only to themselves but also to their families and communities. Marriage requires thinking beyond one’s own needs. It transforms two individuals into a union based on shared aspirations, and in doing so establishes a formal investment in the well-being of society. The fact that individuals who happen to be gay want to share in this vital social institution is evidence that conservative ideals enjoy widespread acceptance. Conservatives should celebrate this, rather than lament it.
Legalizing same-sex marriage would also be a recognition of basic American principles, and would represent the culmination of our nation’s commitment to equal rights. It is, some have said, the last major civil-rights milestone yet to be surpassed in our two-century struggle to attain the goals we set for this nation at its formation.
This bedrock American principle of equality is central to the political and legal convictions of Republicans, Democrats, liberals, and conservatives alike. The dream that became America began with the revolutionary concept expressed in the Declaration of Independence in words that are among the most noble and elegant ever written: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
I beleive Ted Olson’s argument is excellent and well thought. However, i can’t say its an argument that i haven’t already heard from pre-existing gay-marriage advocates. As an openly gay young man, i find it comforting that these arguments exist in the face of ignorance and discrimination. But i admit i am still concerned how ready SCOTUS is to hear on the constitutionality of gay-marriage. SCOTUS is a conservative body by its nature, not necessarily because of who sits on the bench. The court just doesn’t like to rock the boat, so to speak, on a regular basis. It is true SCOTUS has good history with judging on the side of equality, but we must remember that cases like Brown v. Board were decided not on their own but after a slew of smaller cases were faught and won by civil-rights activists. It wasn’t a “break” from tradition as much as i believe some like to argue it is. The court had good precedent to rule the way it did. So we need to ensure that the precedent exists to allow SCOTUS to rule in favor of marriage equality and not be hindered by its own conservative nature.
Read the full NEWSWEEK article here
You are currently browsing the archives for the LGBT category.
Facebook